12/20/22
So as I’ve been saying for almost three years now, our political leadership and “expert” medical and scientific classes seem to be populated largely, in fact almost entirely, with idiots and liars. Today is another case in point as we take a look at a “study” published in The American Journal of Medicine entitled “COVID Vaccine Hesitancy and Risk of a Traffic Crash” which, in case you haven’t figured it out tells us being unvaccinated is a sign of recklessness which is supported by the fact that if you are unvaxxed, you’re more likely to be in a car accident. They even show us this cool graph:
Case closed, roll up that sleeve.
There is so much wrong with this piece of garbage it’s hard to know where to begin but my point is not to debunk the “study”. Any fourth grader could do that. My point is to highlight the criminal stupidity that now passes for “science” and to remind you that you’re being lied to all the time every day by everybody (except me – there is absolutely no upside to my quest for truth and sanity). So when Aunt Karen shows up at Christmas waving this study around, here’s what you tell her.
Some quotes from the paper (my bold):
“Coronavirus disease (COVID) vaccine hesitancy is a reflection of psychology that might also contribute to traffic safety.” Their hypothesis is that if you’re reckless enough to not get vaxxed, you’re a danger to others on the road (or really anywhere else for that matter). They conclude “These data suggest that COVID vaccine hesitancy is associated with significant increased risks of a traffic crash. An awareness of these risks might help to encourage more COVID vaccination.” As always, please be aware of the "qualifier words" like "might" and "suggest"The data "might suggest" something you want it to if you're a politically ideological crazy person who decided on the outcome before the experiment, but that doesn't make it true. And please understand what these morons are saying; what they’re saying is not really that stupid anti-vaxxers are by their nature more dangerous or reckless (one might say the people who lined up and blindly took a shot that nobody on earth knew anything about are the reckless ones, but whatever), what they’re saying is, LITERALLY, getting vaxxed will protect you from getting in a car accident. That’s what they’re saying; read the quote again. If you are made aware of the association between vaccine hesitancy and getting in car crashes, you might be encouraged to get the shot – because that will somehow protect you from car crashes. That’s what they’re saying. By what magic the jab could provide protection against a car crash is anybody’s guess, but that’s what we call “science” today.
Here are just a few data points that queer this whole study:
The unvaxxed in Canada could not use planes, trains, or buses for some time, so they were much more likely to be driving than the vaxxed. The idiots who did this research should have used miles driven to even the playing field. If the unvaxxed drove three times more miles (because they had to) but got in only twice as many accidents, then they would actually be protected from car accidents by being unvaxxed. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it! But of course, that’s not what the authors looked at.
The vaxxed were more likely to work remotely; sequestered deep under their beds, they drove less. See above.
“Essential workers” who could not work from home and had to commute to work and therefore drive more, have lower vax rates. See above.
People over 65 were much less likely to be involved in car crashes. They’re also much less likely to be commuting to work. See above.
Here’s a really funny one: “This definition reflected incidents sending a patient to an emergency department as a driver, passenger, or pedestrian (codes V00-V69).” Listen, I can understand the argument that more reckless people (the unvaxxed) are more likely to jump out from between two parked cars and get hit by oncoming traffic; I think it's a stupid argument, but I can understand it; but how in all that's holy do you explain some correlation between being unvaxxed and sitting in a car seat? So even being unvaccinated as a passenger puts you at more risk...because you're unvaxxed? And again, the argument is if you would just get vaccinated you wouldn't get in a car accident...while sitting in the passeger seat. What do we call that? Oh yeah, “science”.
Let’s unpack that a bit. Let’s say I’m five-times vaxxed (and waiting with great anticipation for when I’m “eligible” for number six) and for reasons unknown, I decide to risk life and limb by driving three of my unvaxxed friends someplace (of course I wouldn’t really be friends with them anymore, but for argument’s sake, play along) and we get in an accident; and while this study doesn’t differentiate as to who is responsible for any accident (that might be important to know if you’re trying to establish recklessness), let’s say in this case it’s my fault. And let's say the car I rear-end has another two stupid, dangerous unvaccinated people in it who are just sitting at a red light. So now the “data” record one vaccinated car crash victim and FIVE unvaxxed troglodytes. See, the unvaxxed get in accidents FIVE TIMES MORE than the vaccinated. SCIENCE!
How about my wife and I, both science-deniers, are crossing the street (only when the little sign says we can) and along comes a fully vaccinated gentleman who drops dead at the wheel from a heart attack (of unknown causes…of course) and he runs us over. Data says…two unvaxxed, one vaxxed. SSSSCCIIEEEENCE!! By the way, this study excluded all sudden deaths that caused accidents and 84% of all deaths at the scene. I wonder why.
In point of fact, in this study's dataset, out of 6,682 total people included, only 2,856 were drivers while 1,189 were passengers and 2,637 were pedestrians (I'm gonna guess a whole lot of those pedestrians were looking at their phones). You will notice that just sitting in a car as an unvaxxed individual literally almost doubles your chances of being in a car accident. Man those vaccines really are effective. Where do I sign up?
Also, the study only lasted one month so the possibility that many newly vaxxed people were misclassified is problematic. Remember, you’re not considered vaxxed until two weeks after you get stuck. Researchers way smarter than me have calculated if just 602 out of the 6,682 people in this study were misclassified, the differences between the groups would vanish.
Wait, there's more:
The authors tell us in the discussion “The study does not test the reliability of COVID vaccination as a proxy for COVID vaccine hesitancy.” So the entire premise of their study, which is ““Does COVID vaccine hesitancy correlate with the risks of a serious traffic crash?” is completely unsubstantiated. It’s COMPLETE nonsense.
But if you’re wondering why in the world anyone would conduct such a ridiculous study, or why some journal would publish such garbage, here’s your answer:
“The observed risks might also justify changes to driver insurance policies in the future.”
Can you say “social credit score” (conspiracy kook alert!)? If you don’t capitulate and do as you’re told we’ll rate your car insurance premiums because those who think for themselves are inherently more dangerous. It’s been proven in studies after all.
Do you get it yet?
“onavirus disease (COVID) vaccine hesitancy is a a a